Ken Borland

Not for the first time this season, the Sharks passed their test in terms of determination and effort, but failed when it came to execution and taking chances, their 24-21 defeat at the hands of Ulster allowing the Bulls to overtake them on the final United Rugby Championship log and snatch a home quarterfinal.

And, with the Sharks finishing fifth and the Bulls’ fourth, it means the KwaZulu-Natalians will have to travel to Pretoria to take on the Currie Cup champions at Loftus Versfeld on the weekend of June 4 to try and keep their URC hopes alive.

Given what was at stake in Belfast, it was a poor display by the Sharks. Soft defensive moments cost them in the first half as Ulster rattled up a 17-0 lead, and then, although they dominated most of the second half, the Sharks were not accurate enough to turn that into tries. Until the last five minutes, when they scored twice to lend respectability to the scoreline.

“The guys played with a lot of energy, they played their hearts out and I’m very proud of the guys for the courage they showed,” coach Sean Everitt said. “The way they fought back justifies that.

“But our first half was not great, our defence was not sharp enough and we gave Ulster two tries they really did not have to work for.

“The second half was a different story and we had opportunities. We played some really good rugby to get into good positions. But unfortunately we lost the breakdown battle, Ulster put a lot of pressure on us there and they defended really well.

“But we played some of the best ball-in-hand rugby we’ve produced this season, we had good territory and field position, and credit to the bench for the huge impact they made,” Everitt said.

It was always going to be a tough test playing one of the Irish powerhouses away, and the Sharks now need to find a way to win at Loftus Versfeld, where they have not enjoyed a good time in recent knockout matches.

“Coming to the Kingspan Stadium was tough, it’s not an easy ground to play at. Ulster are a big and physical side.

“Big lessons were learned, but we are still very disappointed, it was a game that got away from us. We could have … ,“ Everitt mused without finishing his sentence.

There will be a bonanza of rugby at Loftus Versfeld this week with the Bulls taking on the Free State Cheetahs in a Currie Cup game on Wednesday and then also hosting a United Rugby Championship Jukskei derby against the Lions on Saturday.

And, if the players’ comments at Monday’s press conferences are to be believed, they don’t know yet whether they will be playing in the Currie Cup, the URC or both. The Bulls are set to name their team to play the Cheetahs shortly before midday on Tuesday.

For some players, it may be a bit unsettling, but centre Harold Vorster said he is one of the Bulls who is quite happy with the dual squad arrangement.

“It’s a difficult thing running both a URC and a Currie Cup team at the same time. But we’re enjoying it, it doesn’t matter which one you play in. I don’t care which team I’m in, when you get a chance, you’re just excited to play.

“Your opportunity can come at any time of the week, especially with Covid, and you need to be on the same page as everyone else whether you’re playing Currie Cup or URC,” Vorster said on Monday.

Of course, the last time the Bulls played at Loftus Versfeld, they let slip a 26-18 lead with 12 minutes remaining to lose 30-26 to the Stormers, a maiden defeat at home with Jake White as coach. It left a sour taste in the month and the Bulls produced an impressive performance in response last weekend against the Lions at Ellis Park.

Now it is the Lions who travel to Pretoria eager to erase the hurt from their previous outing.

“The Stormers game was a big disappointment, but fortunately we got another opportunity to fix what went wrong against the Lions. Our focus was just on getting back on track and being the best we can be,” Vorster said.

“We put the Lions under a lot of pressure and executed very well. I don’t think the Lions lack anything, they’re still a very good side, and it’s a fresh week, Saturday is gone and over.

“I’m sure the Lions will prepare very well and we’ll have to set new standards for ourselves,” Vorster said.

Lungi Ngidi returned to international action for the first time since July on Sunday, and the facts are that even though he struggled initially, he still ended up taking all three wickets to fall on an opening day of toil for the Proteas against India at Centurion.

India, led by Lokesh Rahul’s determined 122 not out, scored 272/3 on the opening day of the series. But from South Africa’s perspective, Ngidi’s return of 3/45 in 17 overs was a big positive considering the worries over his fitness leading into the series.

While the 25-year-old was adamant that he is physically fine, he admitted to initially struggling with his rhythm, before a change of ends helped him considerably. Ngidi took the new ball from the Hennops River End and looked rusty, as did most of the bowlers as openers Rahul and Mayank Agarwal (60) put on 117 for the first wicket.

Ngidi then removed both Agarwal and Cheteshwar Pujara (0) with successive deliveries midway through the second session, both falling to deliveries that snaked back into them.

“Physically I’m good, it’s not as if I’ve been sitting around vegetating, there’s been lots of training and game simulations,” Ngidi said on Sunday. “But I got more rhythm, I was more comfortable and my action felt better from the West Lane End.

“I asked at lunch if I could switch ends because at first I struggled to find my right length and areas. I just felt more comfortable from the other end.

“They were wobble-seam balls, you can’t be sure which way they will seam, but more often than not they come into the batsman. I was trying to create a bit of doubt, attack the stumps and pads more.

“They were leaving well and we expected more swing, so when the pitch is not doing as much as you expected, then you have to change plans,” Ngidi explained.

Ngidi also picked up the huge scalp of Virat Kohli, having him caught at first slip for 35, just when he was starting to show all his class. Again, the Proteas and their fans can raise a glass to Ngidi’s willingness to try something different. Kohli and Rahul were in command, having added 82 for the third wicket, when Ngidi surprised the Indian captain with a full and wide away-swinger.

“That ball gives you a chance, sometimes you have to take a gamble. In 2018 at the Wanderers I got him out with a similar delivery.

“He’s really good off his legs and through the covers, but I gave him something he maybe didn’t expect. It would have looked like a free ball to hit, but there was a bit of nibble.

“It was a roll of the dice and it went my way,” Ngidi beamed.

It was never going to be a dolly of a catch that Social Justice and Nation-Building ombudsman Advocate Dumisa Ntsebeza found himself under, but given the evidence provided during the last week of hearings, his job over the next month in compiling his final report should be like taking a firmly-struck drive straight to you in the covers.

Given the legal pedigree of Ntsebeza, I would be surprised if he fumbled. Even though the way assistant Sandile July seems to have already made up his mind about who the villains of this piece are is a bit like your team-mate distracting you under a high catch by also trying to get under it.

As Ntsebeza has often reminded, his brief is to find whether there has been racial and gender discrimination in South African cricket.

For those of us who have been involved in the game since unity, the evidence has clearly backed up what we knew all along. There was most certainly racial discrimination and lingering Apartheid attitudes that caused some fine cricketers and people to be dreadfully treated.

But since around 2010, the issue becomes cloudier. The national team became more representative and more aware of diversity and cultural differences. Cricket South Africa’s Board became majority Black.

The last week has seen Ntsebeza admit that the evidence provided by those found guilty of attempting to corrupt the game – Alviro Petersen, Lonwabo Tsotsobe, Ethy Mbhalati and Thami Tsolekile – that they had been discriminated against on the basis of their colour, was “a red herring”.

Ntsebeza expressed his regret that so much time had been spent on the issue, likening it to “a runaway horse” that was eventually corralled by the testimony of those who led the matchfixing investigation in 2015/16.

So their evidence – save for some of the harrowing tales from Tsolekile’s youth – should be discounted. Along with that of former CSA independent director Eugenia Kula-Ameyaw, who ironically came up with the SJN idea.

That she actually has very little clue on the game in this country was borne out by much of her evidence being picked apart by the compelling testimony of SACA chief executive Andrew Breetzke, CSA’s acting head of pathways Eddie Khoza and acting CEO Pholetsi Moseki.

High-profile lawyer David Becker, along with Moseki, also cleared up many of the untruths about how Graeme Smith came to be in CSA’s service as director of cricket.

It is a pity that none of Smith, Mark Boucher or AB de Villiers have given public testimony, but hopefully there is enough in their affidavits for Ntsebeza to have a clear picture of their side of the story.

It is to be hoped that Ntsebeza, who seemed to grow increasingly frustrated towards the end of the hearings but managed to remain in control and exude a definite air of fairness, is able to produce a final report that CSA can call into service to ensure they continue the progress in transformation that they have made.

The importance of the SJN is to guide CSA into the future and not to settle the scores of those who are bitter, especially those who are chiefly responsible for their own demise.

Selection and quotas will always be a contentious issue. And even though Khaya Zondo was clearly unfairly treated in 2015, it is difficult to say it was on the basis of his colour given the fact that Black people, and not just De Villiers, were involved in that controversy.

Speaking of being unfair, July himself admitted that targets were discriminatory but were designed to undo previous wrongs. It is an argument with huge merit, but the other side of the coin is that innocent people are being punished for the sins of their fathers.

I always think the opinions of West Indian great Michael Holding should guide one’s view in most cricketing discussions. But even he appeared a bit stumped by the whole quotas issue when he addressed the SJN hearings at their closure.

Calling them “an unnecessary burden” for players of colour, allowing the churlish to say they are only in the team because of regulations, he added that he understood the reason for them because people wanted to see a team that is fully representative and that the fear is, without quotas, this will not happen quickly enough.

Holding said he hoped they would eventually no longer be necessary.

My hope is that the SJN leads to exactly that, where all cricketers in this country have an equal opportunity to play for the Proteas.